Search results

This paper aims to examine the effects of firm size on audit proposal readability and audit proposal readability on auditor selection using readability metrics.

Adopting the Flesch reading ease readability formula, the authors analyze the readability of 370 hand-collected audit proposals submitted by audit firms for US state and local governments’ audit service contracts.

The authors find differences in readability across audit firm size, specifically the proposals written by smaller firms are more readable than those submitted by larger firms. The results further indicate that readability metrics correlate with auditor selection, i.e. an increase in audit proposal readability from the first to third quartile improves the likelihood of a firm winning the engagement by about 6 per cent, ceteris paribus. In addition, while audit fees and an existing auditor–client relationship are associated with engagement success, proxies for audit quality (i.e. audit firm size, audit experience of lead partner) are not.

The Flesch reading ease measure is a simple linear combination of text attributes, which assumes that readability is a single, unidimensional construct. Simple readability metrics, such as the Flesch reading ease, may confound environmental complexity with readability.

Readability improves audit proposal success.

The results provide insight to accounting stakeholders regarding the potential influence of readability on audit firm selection. In short, readability matters.

This paper aims to introduce the emerging artificial-intelligence-based readability metrics (Coh-Metrix) to examine the effects of firm size on audit proposal readability.

Coh-Metrix readability measures use emerging computation linguistics technology to better assess document readability. These metrics measure co-relations of words, sentences and paragraphs on multi-dimensions rather than adopting the unidimensional “bag of words” approach that examines words in isolation. Using eight Coh-Metrix orthogonal principal component factors, the authors analyze the Chang and Stone (2019) data set comprised of 370 hand-collected audit proposals submitted by audit firms for the US state and local governments’ audit service contracts.

Audit firm size has a significant impact on the readability of audit proposals. Specifically, as measured by the traditional readability metric, the proposals from smaller firms are more readable than those submitted by larger firms. Furthermore, decomposed readability metrics indicate that smaller firm proposals evidence stronger (deep) text cohesion, whereas larger firm proposals evidence a stronger narrative structure and higher connectivity (relational indicators) among proposal elements. Unlike the traditional readability metric, however, the emergent readability metrics are uncorrelated with auditor selection.

Work remains to develop and validate Coh-Metrix measures that are specific to the context of accounting and auditing practice. Future research can use emerging readability measures to examine various textual features (e.g. text cohesion) in finance or accounting related documents.

The results provide practitioners with insight into the proposal writing strategies and practices of larger and smaller firms. In addition, the results highlight the differing audit firm selection outcomes from traditional and Coh-Metrix readability metrics.

This study introduces new data and holistic readability measures to the auditing literature.

Practising internal and external auditors regularly find that crucial concepts governing how they operate are the twin terms of independence and objectivity. Part of the problem is that the two terms are often equated. The impact can be conflict with the auditee, misunderstanding with other stakeholders, impairment of efficiency and effectiveness, and role conflict within the internal audit department. The Institute of Internal Auditors is reviewing some of the cherished notions of internal audit in the light of pressures and developments in the business environment. It has already produced a new definition of internal auditing, which, as before, includes the terms independence and objectivity. Consistently, it decided to re‐evaluate these two terms, and established an international research team. This was the briefing submission from the UK, which was highly influential in determining the final product, not yet in the public domain. It considers professional statements and standards, research and developments in both internal and external auditing.

In recent international debates on auditing regulation, Spain has assumed a real prominence as a claimed practical example of where a policy of mandatory audit firm rotation did not work and was duly abolished. This study aims to provide an analysis of the implementation and subsequent removal of mandatory audit firm rotation in Spain in the 1990s.

This takes the form of historical analysis; the evidence in the paper derives from congressional hearings, financial newspapers and documents produced by the professional associations of auditors in Spain.

This paper demonstrates that at no stage was mandatory rotation of audit firms ever enforced on Spanish auditors. Further, the revision and subsequent removal of the Spanish law on mandatory audit firm rotation emerge as a rather politicized process, with no evident reference being made in the process of legislative reform to Spanish auditing experiences. The analysis also reveals that at the very time that Spain was being cited internationally for rejecting mandatory audit firm rotation, Spanish political parties and regulators were debating whether to “re‐introduce” such a regulation.

The clear implication of the paper is that considerable caution needs to be taken in today's international‐auditing arena, when analyzing the standpoints and claims made by professional associations and the evidence they provide to support their arguments for and against regulatory reform.

The objective of this paper is to extend the debate on audit quality in the less complex entity (LCE) context by analyzing comment letters submitted to the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). The IAASB has drafted a new, stand-alone standard for audits of LCEs’ financial statements.

The Gioia method is utilized to conduct the qualitative analysis. This enables the material to shine and provide a comprehensive picture of the important aspects of the comment letters about the International Standard on Auditing (ISA) for LCEs. A content analysis of the 145 comment letters is conducted to identify the extent of the support for and the arguments against the new, stand-alone draft standard for audits of LCEs’ financial statements. In addition, this study considers how the comment letters describe the respondents’ views on audit quality in relation to the new standard. Finally, the tone of the comment letters and audit quality arguments is investigated.

The findings provide a useful framework of the most frequently used arguments supporting and opposing the ISA for LCEs. Within the themes identified, a wide variety of issues and concerns are discussed. The results reveal that the arguments in the comment letters are contradictory. For instance, when discussing audit quality, those interest groups that perceived many positive opportunities in the adoption of the ISA for LCEs thought that the audit quality would increase. Conversely, those interest groups that were skeptical about the success of the ISA for LCEs argued that the audit quality could be compromised by the general prejudice that the ISA for LCEs might be perceived as a lower-quality audit with fewer procedures.

This paper is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the first to examine the content of comment letters in the context of a new, stand-alone standard for audits of LCEs. The international audience can utilize the results in the context of the widely discussed issue of reducing LCEs’ auditing obligations. This study aims to contribute to the two streams of accounting literature concerning audit quality and political lobbying.

The gap between what the public expects from the auditor and what the auditor perceives his or her role to be has exacerbated crises within the accounting profession. Perceived audit failures, followed by historically large law suits, have resulted in the alteration of accounting firms’ behavior. Ironically, the response has done little to alleviate the crisis in public confidence and has led to other concerns related to the auditor‐client relationship. Discusses issues associated with the expectation gap and posits that the profession’s efforts to educate users as to the nature of the audit process is a necessary, but insufficient, response. A two‐part strategy is proposed to effect structural change of the auditor‐client environment. Part one of the strategy calls for greater involvement of regulators in selecting the external auditor and requiring auditor rotation. Part two of the strategy proposes market‐based instruments, audit failure permits and audit disaster futures, to deal with remaining audit risk.

This study provides public administrators with an introduction into research of the determinants of audit fees. A working knowledge of external audit cost determinants can help public administrators hone their evaluation skills for use in audit-procurement. Most prior research on audit cost determinants has focused on the few hundred cities in the nation with populations exceeding 50,000. As a result, this study investigated the audit costs incurred by small cities with populations less than 50,000.

Besides providing a glimpse of small-city auditing practices, the study tested the significance of the Single Audit Act in audit-fee determination. Missouri municipalities with populations between 2,000 and 50,000 provided the sample for the study. Because Missouri is one of the few states in the nation that neither legislates nor monitors municipal auditing, it represents an unregulated audit market in which town officials decide on the need for an audit, the firm to conduct the audit, and the process by which the audit firm is selected. The results of a nine-variable regression model suggested that the size of the town, the existence of a city administrator, the complexity of the town's operation, the method of accounting, the timing and completion time of the audit, and audit-firm specialization in municipal auditing were important determinants of audit fees.

This study aims to examine the relationship between the attributes of audit firms (Big 4, audit fees, busy season, audit firm tenure and audit partner gender) and the impact of these attributes on key audit matters (KAM) readability in Malaysia.

The auditor's reports and financial data were analysed from a sample of FTSE 100 Malaysia-listed companies for the fiscal years 2017–2019, consisting of 258 observations. Panel regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the possible associations between audit firm attributes and KAM readability. The Flesch reading ease score and Coleman–Liau index were applied to measure KAM readability.

The findings show that female audit partners significantly impact KAM readability; further analysis also revealed that companies audited by Big 4 audit firms and higher audit fees tend to report a more readable KAM disclosure in the FTSE 100 in Malaysia.

The regression results provide empirical evidence of the influence of audit firm attributes on KAM readability. This study also examined important corporate governance players, such as external auditors and those charged with governance, who form the audit committee's qualities when analysing the determinants of KAM reporting variations in Malaysia.

Statistical analysis is based on annual data collected from 132 Boursa Kuwait listed firms from 2016 to 2019 (i.e. yielding 528 firm-year observations). During the observation window (i.e. 2016 to 2019) 116 firms switched from joint-to solo-audits. Level and change models test if audit quality (proxied by abnormal accruals) is impacted by joint-/solo-audit switching. Therefore this paper explores the audit quality following abolition of mandated joint-audits in Kuwait.

This paper investigates the impact on audit quality following abolition of mandated joint-audit requirements in 2016 in Kuwait. The study is differentiated from prior analysis by focusing on an emerging economy setting, and by considering a more expansive set of joint-audit pairings, solo-audit types and switching options.

Abolition of mandated joint-audit requirements prompted a majority of Boursa Kuwait listed firms to switch to solo-audits. Analysis indicates that switch does not significantly decrease audit quality. Also, audit quality changes are not dependent on the specific joint-audit pairing/solo-audit type switch.

Analysis is based on a single national setting comprising a small set of firms. Nonetheless, results imply the impact of joint-/solo-audit switching following abolition of mandated requirements is more universal with generalizability to different economic settings.

Results indicate that following elimination of mandated joint-audit requirements, firms have a propensity to favor solo-audits. Irrespective of the joint-audit pairing and solo-audit type, findings show a joint-/solo-audit switch does not compromise audit quality.

Analysis is the first to investigate the impact of joint/solo-audit switches on audit quality in an emerging economy with tests considering more joint-audit pairings than assessed previously.